Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr Y’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Curtis Banks and Fidelity should:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Ms T complaint is upheld and to put matters right Fast Pensions should provide a full written response to Ms T’s questions regarding the status and security of the Plan, including the current value, and assist her in exercising her statutory right to a transfer if she so wishes.

Fast Pensions should also pay Ms T, £1,000, to reflect the significant distress and inconvenience caused to her by their maladministration.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs I’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right within 21 days NOW: Pensions are to:

• Provide Mrs I with a correct benefit statement showing that all missing contributions have been paid into the Plan;
• Calculate and pay into the Plan any loss of investment growth that Mrs I has suffered for the funds not being in her pension; and
• Pay Mrs I £500 for the distress and inconvenience she has suffered.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs A’s complaint is upheld, and to put matters right Prudential should provide a personal pension plan for her, containing the appropriate amount of money.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Complaint summary

Mrs A has complained that neither the PCSPS nor Prudential is accepting responsibility to provide her with pension benefits which in 1990 she requested to be transferred from the PCSPS to Prudential.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Coker Engineering’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right within the next 21 days NOW: Pensions need to:

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mr E complaint is upheld and to put matters right BT should review the matter again in light of my comments within this Determination.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Complaint summary

Mr E complains that BT, his former employer, refused to award him BT’s medical retirement benefits.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs B’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right Barclays shall consider again whether Mrs B satisfied the criteria for ill health retirement at the date her employment was terminated and pay Mrs B £500 for distress and inconvenience caused.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Complaint summary

Mrs B’s complaint is that she has been refused ill health retirement from the date her employment ended.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs L’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right the Council shall consider whether Mrs L satisfied the criteria for Tier 2 benefits as at June 2014 and that this whole matter has caused Mrs L significant distress and inconvenience, which warrants a payment to Mrs L by the Council of £800.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs S’s complaint is upheld, and to put matters right Phoenix Life should pay her £1,000, including £500 for her distress and inconvenience.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.

Complaint summary

Mrs S’s complaint against Phoenix, the scheme administrator, is that it unreasonably delayed a transfer of her funds to another provider.

Ombudsman’s Determination

Outcome

Mrs R’s complaint is upheld and to put matters right MyCSP should, with Cabinet Office guidance, put a suitable procedure in place and use that to assess Mrs R’s circumstances to see whether she meets the criteria for living together as a married couple.

My reasons for reaching this decision are explained in more detail below.